Conscious Conservatives Fight for Private Property

Many conservatives are aware of the 2005 Kelo decision, which gave broad latitude to local governments in the use of eminent domain.  Conscious Conservatives should be against eminent domain in almost every situation.  It is sad that the current President of the United States claims conservative support, yet bragged about using eminent domain as part of his real estate deals.  Private property must be respected. There is little abuse of government power greater than using the collective authority to take property from one citizen to give to another. 

Another concept that is supported by some conservatives but should be disdained by all is civil asset forfeiture.  Originally a means to confiscate stolen property and contraband, government has turned seizing assets into a profit making operation.  In some states, a police officer can take your property simply by alleging they have probable cause that a crime might have been committed.  State laws, court fees and procedures make getting the property back more costly than the value of the property.  In many cases, there has been no crime committed and the person whose property was taken is never charged with a crime.  An Arizona case was settled out of court, which means that no precedent will be set.  It also means the plaintiffs were unable to get confirmation that seized asses were being used to purchase personal items for police department leaders.     Asset Seizures Lawsuit Reaches Settlement  

Below is a chart from Mother Jones which shows how asset forfeiture has increased at the federal level.

Abolish the Income Tax

Most people don't know that the Income Tax is relatively new in the history of the United States.  Although initiated with the 16th amendment in 1913, it was not widely used at that time and did not become the major contributor to the federal budget until the 1950s.  An interesting historical observation is that the high income taxes of the 1950s were supposed to be temporary.  They were designed to balance the budget from the debts incurred due to World War II and the Marshall Plan.  However, Congress soon found a way to spend this new revenue and then some more.  President Johnson stated that the United States could afford "Guns and Butter" and the income tax was here to stay. 

As this drawing from Harper's Weekly by Thomas Nast shows, many in the United States considered the income tax a form of slavery.  That is probably the best reason to get rid of the tax.  The income of most people is derived from labor, either physical or intellectual.  There is no moral reason to claim that anyone has a right to another person's labor.

Another reason why the income tax is not part of a free society is that Congress uses it not only to raise revenue but to control behavior.  This has a long history in the United States, going back to Hamilton's WhiskeyTax.  The tax code is at least 2500 pages long. That is because there are all sort of behaviors which people in Congress wish to reward, like buying solar panels and others that they wish to punish, like selling real estate.

The main reason why income taxes should be abolished is that it is a very efficient but easy to hide way to reward political supporters and punish political enemies.  A simple change in the tax code can change a tax burden drastically.  A tax change can also bankrupt an industry or send billions in the direction of certain industry.

A properly sized government can be funded without a personal income tax.  Income tax, by taking a portion of a person's labor, can be seen as a form of slavery.  The income tax is used more to control behavior than to raise revenue.  It is also an efficient and obscure way for political forces to pick winners and losers in the marketplace.  Due to these factors and more, the income tax should be immediately abolished.

Stopping Inflation

We talked about the problem of inflation last week.  The picture above shows a good example of why inflation should be stopped.  Somebody who had $20 in 1988 could just about feed their family for a week.  I was married in 1988 and remember a food budget of $10.00 per week for my wife and myself.  If they put that $20.00 in a jar, by 2013 that same $20.00 might just make a decent meal.  This discourages people from saving and encourages spending.  

How do we stop inflation?  The best way is to slow or stop money creation.  One the the best ways to do this is to create a system where money cannot be created out of thin air.  Currently, money is primarily created out of thin air by two methods, deficit spending by governments and expansion of credit by the banking industry.

This wasn't always the case.  Traditionally, paper money was a "note" or "IOU" statement that represented a real commodity.  Gold and silver have been particularly popular.  The $20 bill used to be redeemable for an ounce of gold.  Currently, that ounce of gold can be traded for more than $1000.  That is plenty of groceries.  If money is tied to a commodity like gold or silver, in order to print more, you have to acquire more gold and silver.  That stops inflation in two ways.  The first is that it stops overprinting of money.  The second is that even if money is overprinted, there is an underlying understanding as to what the money is worth.  A $20 bill=an ounce of gold=two carts of groceries.

People correctly argue that there is now probably too much money to go back to the Gold Standard ,   However, there is no reason to not use a variety or Basket of Commodities .  Although the value of some commodities change relative to others, this is usually a slower and less drastic process than how paper (or electronic) money with no backing changes value.  An ounce of gold is still the same chunk of metal it has been for thousands of years.  However, the value of a paper dollar relative to that metal changes by the second.  I believe the biggest error people make is saying that the price of gold has changed.  It should be said that the value of the dollar has changed.

We should make all paper or electronic money exchangeable for a real asset that can be touched.  We should also require that any bank or government that creates more money should have to acquire more of that asset first.  That way, the value of money will be stable and won't be manipulated by those in power for their own gain. 

The Problems With Inflation

Inflation is a difficult subject, which is why most politicians avoid it.  Most definitions of Inflation tend to focus on one of its main effects, increase in prices.  Inflation is really an increase in the money supply relative to the number of goods being produced.   If there is more money than goods, the money is worth less (if there is too much money, it becomes worthless).  The opposite condition is called "deflation."  Deflation occurs when production of goods increases and more money is not created.

There is a general rule.  Inflation is good for whoever gets the money first (i.e. government, banks, large corporations) and deflation is good for whoever gets the money last (small businesses, workers).  Governments usually create the money, so they try to convince the populace that inflation is good.  That is because they want to have the ability to create money in order to reward constituents.  Notice that the Federal Reserve in the United States has an inflation target, not a deflation target or stability target Why is 2 percent the Federal Reserve's inflation target? Because it is. In the United States, money creation has been shifted to the banking system through creation of credit.  Banks also have an interest in creating inflation.  The more money they can lend, the more profit they can make.    Actually neither inflation nor deflation is an ideal condition.  The best condition is where the amount of money roughly matches increases in production and population.  Since this cannot be achieved perfectly, a money should go through brief periods of inflation and deflation, with the goal of keeping money stable. 

Problems with inflation--

For the individual--  Worker's' salaries do not keep up with inflation.  Workers in the United States today have seen their buying power decrease steadily.  Inflation also takes away the power of saving and investment for the average family.  30 years ago, somebody who had a million dollars or won a million dollars in a lottery was considered to have enough money to last forever.  They could be said to be rich.  Now, people who are trying to retire with one million dollars in investment accounts are finding it is not enough money for even a modest lifestyle.

For public policy--  Inflation creates an environment where the government is trying to catch its own tail with various entitlement programs.  The federal government collected little money for entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare.  In 1975, the average recipient of Social Security received around 200 dollars per month.  What would that buy today?  Now, the average recipient receives more than $1300 per month.  The problem is that when they were workers in 1975, they only paid an amount of Social Security Tax sufficient to cover $200/month.  In fact, most did not earn enough annual income in 1975 to support a $1300/month payment later in life.  Inflation means that government has to cover that difference.  The crazy thing is that $200/month in 1975 bought more than $1300 today.  The average rent payment was only about $80 per month  Rent of Primary Residence Inflation Calculator .  Due to inflation, an $80 monthly rent is impossible today. 

Next time, we will go into some plans to stabilize currency. 

Make Votes Count Again

Approximately 1/2 of all voters skip general elections in the United States.  The number is even higher in regular elections that do not include voting for a major office like president.  Both the Republican and the Democratic candidates in the 2016 election only had about 1/4 of the voters choose to their electors.  No candidate for president in the lifetime of most people has been endorsed by 1/3 of the voters.

The primary reason for voters skipping elections is lack of choice on the ballot.  Most people do not know the reasons, but instinctively know that the ballots are rigged, forcing them to make a choice between "the lesser of two evils."  It wasn't always like this and has gotten much worse since the candidacy of Ross Perot and the election of Jesse Ventura.

There are dozens of tricks which legislators who are members of the Democratic and Republican parties use to rig the ballots.  The primary technique is the  "two largest" laws.  These laws state that only candidates from parties which are either the "two largest" by voter registration or whose candidates received the "two highest" vote totals in a prior election get special privileges.

An example of this is the presidential primary system.  In many states, only the "two largest" parties get to choose their own presidential candidates.  Other parties will have the names of whatever candidate won the primary in that state.  This is called "substitution."  For example, the Republican Party of Ohio was able to "substitute" Donald Trump's name for that of John Kasich on the Ohio ballot.  Other parties did not have that privilege. 
In Arizona, people are only allowed to register to vote as members of the party whose candidates received the "two highest" vote totals for governor (Republican and Democrat) without going through a special procedure.  Those who don't check the Republican or Democratic box are considered "other."  So why doesn't another party just get a higher vote total in a future election?  Since people are not allowed to register as members of their party, they are not allowed to have candidates on the ballot.  It is Republican vs. Democrat until the law is changed. 

Some other random tricks:

North Carolina allows people to donate more money to the Republican and Democratic parties than the other parties.

In Pennsylvania all candidates, except Republicans and Democrats, must collect 5000 signatures to run for office and those signatures must be spread out over a 10 county area.

In Arkansas and Texas, candidates, except the Republican and Democratic (see the pattern) must file to run for public office the year BEFORE the election.

The Conscious Conservative belief is that every qualified candidate should have an equal chance to be on the ballot.  All "two largest" laws should be immediately repealed.  If states wish to have a year before or ten county requirement, let them, but they must apply to every candidate.  Anything else is just a rigged election.

The Main Goals of Conscious Conservative

It is easy for pundits, politicians and people, including myself, to get lost in the myriad of issues presented today.  However, I find it necessary to re-focus every once in a while and get back to what is important.  Most issues are just side distractions.  The issues I list below are the ones I believe are key in determining how a government acts towards its people.  If we change these policies, all others will fall into place.

There are four things that need to be accomplished, in no particular order.

1. Restore the vote to the people. Right now, just about every ballot in the United States is rigged in favor of keeping Democrats and Republicans in power. There is no reason that every person who is qualified to run and wishes should not be on the ballot.
2. Return to a sound currency. This is the hardest for people to understand. An inflationary currency benefits those who get the money first. Economists will say, “We need inflation because it gets people to spend.”
3. Get rid of the income tax. The US ran for 170 years without an income tax being a major part of government income. The main purpose of taxation in the US, going back to Hamilton’s “Whiskey Tax,” is to control the population.
4. Restore the sanctity of private property. Even before the Kelo Decision Kelo Eminent Domain - Institute for Justice , government began overstepping its bounds. Government takes the property of unpopular people to redistribute to those who are more popular. 

Only when the votes of people begin to count, the currency is sound, people get to keep the money they earn and people control the property they own, will the power between government and individual citizens be restored to its proper balance. Then we can begin to debate other issues.  I believe that debate will be short as these changes will make most other issues disappear.

The Evils of Politics Based on Envy

I found this interesting video from The Atlas Society.